Friends, as California Governor Gavin Newsom invites bums and bum-ettes worldwide to come live in the Golden State, the current unfortunate inmates of Mexifornia are growing disenchanted with him. The latest burst of COVID-19 probably doesn't help matters. Polls indicate that backers of the recall of Gov. Newsom have a chance at victory. You probably wouldn't want to bet on the recall, given the deep blue complexion of California, but if I were Newsom I wouldn't be resting easy either.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/564994-polls-show-california-recall-gaining-steam
Speaking of polls, the public's optimism is heading south, and so is its opinion of Dear Leader Sleepy Joe. Any reduction in Biden's approval rating, even by a point or two, has real political consequences, especially to his agenda in Congress. Check it out.
No doubt you've heard: the CDC is recommending masks for all -- even the vaccinated -- in areas where the "delta variant" is surging. I say: good luck with that! People got vaccinated on the understanding that vaccines work, which they kinda do. Asking vaccinated people to live by the same rules as unvaccinated people makes little sense. Requiring anyone to wear masks, when the only people getting serious cases of COVID these days are those who've chosen -- for better or worse -- to leave themselves unprotected, makes even less sense. I predict that, if there's a widespread effort to enforce masking on the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike, millions will respond as the Sheriff of Los Angeles County did: with a big, fat shrug.
https://nypost.com/2021/07/27/cdc-to-recommend-some-vaccinated-people-wear-masks-indoors/
Finally, Twitter is at it again, banning any form of "news" that it considers harmful to the integrity and legitimacy of our Bidenist overlords. For shame. Now more than ever we need the courts to enforce and protect our First Amendment rights!
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/twitter-arizona-forensic-audit/2021/07/27/id/1030168/
Well, the biggest news is Jake Ellzey won the House race in TX. Trump strongly supported Susan Wright, even doing robocalls for Wright. Could be that Trump's endorsement is losing its impact.
ReplyDeleteDepending on the poll, Biden's rating is between 50% and 56%. At this stage in his presidency, Trump was between 38% and 43%. The loss of optimism is largely a result of a pandemic that persists because Trumpanzees won't get vaccinated.
I was glad to hear that Biden will announce that all federal employees need to be vaccinated.
As for CA, Newsom hasn't even launched a campaign yet, and he's still ahead. He will be governor after the recall election, and then will be re-elected next year.
The news about the "fraud-it" is the kind of misinformation that keeps the Big Lie going. Twitter still bars that information, so posting it violates Twitter's terms of service. I am not crazy about de facto censorship (Twitter has a perfect right to enforce terms of service, but it does amount to censorship), but protecting the information about the sham audit is not a hill I am ready to die on.
Dr. Waddy from Jack: We could look at it like this: better to let these proto totaliarians sate their irresistable dictatorial compulsions on something as RELATIVELY easy as wearing a mask sometimes. Otherwise harmless chaff has been used to distract antiaircraft missiles. Similarly, this issue may distract the barbarians for awhile with something akin to a feeding frenzy while also building resentment in a yet free electorate. We need not fear encouraging the left in anything; they are already fanactically and irredemably devoted to their long since proven tyrannical ideals!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Many Californians belong to the real America;alot of them are found in Northern California, the agricultural Buck Owens country centering on Bakersfield and in San Diego's environs. But like those of us of that character in CuomoYork, they are outmathed by the left and its so often silly supporters in that casually fearless counterintuitive culture.San Francisco Newsom's actions in all things are predictably far left and, consequentially of course, incipiently totalitarian leftist. Maybe this time, at this time, he has overextended his welcome. Would his deposition signal a sea change in California politics? Probably not; that would probably require consignment of California to a pariah status similar to that assigned to South Africa before its current redemption.
ReplyDeleteJake Ellzey's victory is interesting. I assume lots of Dems voted for him to spite Trump? Anyway, he's a Republican, so neither Trump nor I can be all that chagrined.
ReplyDeleteSome of Biden's approval numbers are now BELOW 50%. He's in the danger zone.
I see you're confident of success in California, Rod. We'll see. I'm guardedly optimistic, but I know better than to expect good judgement in Lala-land.
Jack, I suppose you're right that masking is a lot less onerous than some of the long-range plans that the neo-Marxists have for us. I'll take a mask over the gulag, for instance...
And I agree, Jack, that a GOP victory in the recall race wouldn't really signify much, except strong headwinds for the party-in-power...and maybe strong public dissatisfaction with pandemic-related restrictions. As you say, California would still be blue.
Dr.Waddy from Jack: I know very little of the history of publicly broadcast radio but I would think that at first its impact was not understood. A point was reached at which government perceived a need to regulate it; I do not know when. Perhaps social media has reached a similar point .But we must beware! We saw how the left attempted to use Federal regulation to suppress the obviously dominant popular support of conservative talk radio. It will of course seek to take over any future agency enacted in response to perception, derived from experience, that this medium has an influence as profound as to require prevention of its unpopular usurpation by any doctrine but especially one with proven totalitarian intent.
ReplyDeleteNot sure what is being talked about in terms of publicly broadcast radio. If broadcast radio in general, regulation came about in 1927 because while the Secretary of Commerce could issue licenses to broadcast, he (at the time, Herbert Hoover) could not take them away. Broadcasters were airing on on any frequency they wanted to, creating chaos on the airwaves. Because they were only a limited number of frequencies available, Congress passed the Dill-White Radio Act of 1927, which more tightly oversaw the issuance and revocation of licenses, created the Federal Radio Commission and based regulation on operators running their stations in the public interest, convenience and necessity. Finally, the FRC was prohibited from a priori (before-the-fact) censorship.
ReplyDeleteIf you are talking about public radio, such as NPR, that largely came from FCC Commissioner Freida Hennock in 1952, when with the Sixth Order and Report, the FCC set aside radio and TV frequencies for noncommercial broadcasting. Then the 1967 Public Broadcasting Act provided government funding to offset some costs (in addition to corporate donations, foundation funding, and "contributions from viewers like you."
Jack, I certainly agree that we would want to tread carefully in propounding new federal regulations for any form of media. We could easily do more harm than good.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the history lesson re: radio, Rod. Do you know if any stations have ever had their licenses pulled over objectionable content?
The only content that the FCC permitted to regulate directly is obscenity, as they have to follow Section 18 of the U.S. Criminal Code. The only other content-related regulation is the Equal Opportunity Rules, which means if you offer one candidate opportunity to purchase time for political advertising then you need to offer all legally qualified candidate the same opportunity (including price and time of the day. Then there is the equal time rule, which means if one candidate makes an appearance on the airwaves during a campaign, it needs to be balanced off by candidates for rivals. This rule hardly ever gets enforced now, unless it involved someone who is a current media personality (you can't simultaneously be a talkshow host on TV or radio and run for office -- hello, Larry Elder).
ReplyDeleteThe answer to your question is, no one has ever had a broadcast license pulled over objectionable content. Stations have been fined, but not have lost their license. Almost all station revocations have come about because the station stopped broadcasting. A couple (like WOR in New York) were stripped because the owners engaged in pretty serious crimes.
Dr.Waddy et al from Jack. I agree in expressing thanks for the info on broadcast regulation. I used the the term publcly broadcast radio to mean radio broadcast to the general public rather than to specific recipients for communication (eg. military or maritime. Are the Equal Opportunity Rules not enforced because to do so could require that National (pubicly funded) Radio assure political balance in broadcasts by candidates? NPR demonstrates distinct leftist bias, wrongly so because the conservative tax paying public is forced to payfor it .That strongly suggests that enforcement of Equal Opportunity in broadcasting is opposed by NPR .
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy et al from Jack: NPR appears to depend on taxpayer support. If it doesn't need it, why does it think itself justified in seeking it? NPR, like NEA and CPB displays an obvious overall leftist liberal stance. But liberal commercial radio , eg. feckless liberal talk radio, is a failure. That is because very many people do not want it and do not want to be forced to pay for it. Conservative talk radio is successful because many more people do want it andit is, consequently ,able to earn support in our free economy.NPR presumptuously uses taxpayer money to broadcast elitist opinion and advocacy which often manifests hostility to the beliefs of very many people. That is wrong!
ReplyDeleteThe Equal Opportunity Rule is for offering the opportunity to purchase political advertising. The Equal Time Rule is used for a very specific time -- 60 days before the primary election and 90 days before the general election. It's generally only enforced if an opposing campaign complains. Then it has to be determined if the appearance was because of a bona fide news item. By the time the FCC rules, the campaign is over.
ReplyDeleteAs far as government funding, the purpose is not to provide liberal programming, but noncommercial programming. Government funding -- as well as corporate, foundation and viewer funding -- help keep that system alive.
The history of commercial talk radio is more complicated than conservative = popular, liberal = unpopular. It's true that 16 of the top 20 talkers are conservative. It is also true, though, that 1) the top five radio groups own over 3000 radio stations; 2) that these same groups are the biggest program syndicators; and 3) stations only program one ideology when they program talk (you either have conservative stations or liberal stations, but not a mix). So, it's not exactly a free market in terms of liberal talkers and stations.
Interesting, Rod. My inclination is to conclude that a licensing system that essentially never pulls licenses over questions of content doesn't meaningfully regulate content. Ergo, I guess our radio stations practice "free speech", and I'm glad of it.
ReplyDeleteJack, I think it's more than clear that the government's definition of "equal opportunity" is closely tailored to opportunities for "speech" offered directly to political candidates for office. Otherwise, "bias" runs rampant. I would think, absent the regulation of broadcasting content by the government, one of the more effective "brakes" on the discretion of broadcasters would be the sensitivites of sponsors and adventizers. It always amazed me that no company ever pulled ads over the downright scurrilous attacks launched on President Trump. That's the fault of Trump and the right, though, for not holding their feet to the fire.
It's curious that conservative talk radio has been so much more successful than liberal talk radio, but maybe that has something to do with age demographics? Conservatives tend to be older, and many youngsters wouldn't know how to operate a radio if you gave them one. Another explanation could be that, since the mainstream media is so "left", it's more or less inevitable that conservatives will flee to, and thus dominate, alternative media sources...
Dr. waddy from Jack:Again I am glad for the extensive and creditable information on broadcasting we have received. But: why does noncommercial equal liberal ? I cannot help but think that the unelected officials who administer apparently vital taxpayer funded aid to NPR , ehh, "expect" that it will promote liberal causes and denigrate the conservative views held by so many conservative tax payers.
ReplyDeleteJack, virtually everything that springs from governmental largesse seems to lean left. It's like a law of nature, apparently.
ReplyDelete